Frank commentary from an unretired call girl

Recognizing Doubletalk

On a number of occasions I’ve analyzed news stories and press releases about cops harassing and/or arresting prostitutes (the best examples being October 19th and November 12th), but today I’d like to do something different; I’m sure most of my regular readers can do it for themselves by now, so I’m going to give you a little quiz. The following is a story which appeared on the website of the Fox affiliate in Houston, Texas last Thursday (March 17th); read it carefully and then answer the questions after it. Please don’t think I’m making light of a sister’s misfortune because that is NOT my intention; rather, I hope to use it as a “teachable moment” in order to hasten the day when the public no longer stands for women to be violated by uniformed bullies in this way.

Fort Bend [County] deputies say they’ve arrested the owner/operator of an online-based prostitution business. Robin Jeanette Jordan, 37, was arrested at her Richmond home and charged with Prostitution. She’s sitting in Harris County Jail on a bond worth $5,000. Jordan’s home, in the 2900 block of Jane Long League Drive, is within walking distance of Pecan Grove Elementary School.

Agents with the Fort Bend County Narcotics Task Force were able to infiltrate Jordan’s business in an undercover capacity, according to a sheriff’s office statement. Their investigation unearthed various items of evidence:

— Surveillance footage of persons associated with Jordan’s business. Of note was an individual who is presently on bond for drug-related charges in Fort Bend County.
— Downloaded information from the suspected website that included a list of services and their respective prices.

On March 11, agents obtained a search warrant to look through Jordan’s home. Once there, agents recovered enough evidence to file charges against Jordan:

A woman was at the home. She had 2 prior convictions for Prostitution. The sheriff’s office is withholding her name for the time being. Jordan’s arrest was the result of an ongoing covert investigation. The Houston Police Department’s Vice Division also collaborated in the investigation. Fort Bend’s NTF is a Houston High Intensity Drug Trafficking initiative.

Yes, I know the reporter’s 4th-grade-level writing skills are painful to read, but I wanted you to see it as it appeared (though without the superfluous headings). Read it again to get a clear grasp of the statements and claims, then answer the following as completely as possible:

1) In the first paragraph, why is the home’s proximity to a school mentioned?
2) What does “infiltrate Jordan’s business in an undercover capacity” actually mean? How about “persons associated with Jordan’s business”?
3) Do you think she actually had “a list of services and their respective prices” on her website?
4) How can porn videos be considered “evidence of prostitution”?
5) What is “contraband associated with operating a prostitution organization”?
6) Why aren’t the police releasing the name of the other woman, who apparently wasn’t arrested?
7) What do you think was the actual sequence of events here? Hint: look at the description of the “individual of note” and the last three sentences of the story.

OK, let’s look at my answers. Obviously, you’ll have to grade yourselves on the honor system; your answers needn’t be exact but they should be close. If you feel your answer is better than mine, explain why in a comment and it may invite discussion.

1) Obviously the location of the school is totally immaterial; I daresay more than 75% of suburban houses are within “walking distance” of a school. Clearly, this was included to provoke fear in ignorant readers and thereby stoke public resentment against Jordan. One point for a correct answer, and give yourself a bonus point if you specified any of the following as instrumental in creating that fear: A) “sex rays” from harlotry contaminating the nearby innocents; B) children being abducted into “sex trafficking”; C) unconscious association with registered sex offenders being prohibited from living near schools. Two bonus points if you mentioned more than one.

2) It probably means they knocked on the door in plain clothes and then showed their badges; it could mean she was the subject of a sting but I think that unlikely given my reasoning in the answer to #7. “Associated persons” means either they visited more than once or stayed for more than a few minutes when they visited; they might even be personal friends who had nothing to do with her business. One point for answering the second section, and one for giving either of the answers to the first (two points if you mentioned both).

3) Nope. Brandy Devereaux looked at her site before it was taken down and there was no such “menu”. According to Brandy: “Her site…has been taken down as of sometime last night or yesterday…I could not find prices on the site but it did list “Services I provide” with a rundown of CFS, Russian, GFE, DATY, etc etc.”

Since any escort knows better than to link prices to specific activities, this is just another police lie as is typical in prostitution busts. One point for any “no” answer, two if you mentioned the habitual police lying.

5) “Contraband” means anything legally prohibited from being imported or exported, but ignorant cops sometimes use it to mean any illegal substance. But in any case, there is not one single illegal object or substance “associated with running a prostitution operation”, so this could mean practically anything. Either this mysterious “evidence” really is associated with prostitution but isn’t contraband (for example condoms or sex toys) or it really is contraband but isn’t really associated with prostitution (like Cuban cigars or poached ivory). My best guess is drugs of some kind (since cops like to pretend we’re all druggies); maybe black-market Viagra? (1 point)

6) Because they’re hoping to “flip” her (i.e. threaten her with prosecution so as to frighten her into betraying other people). (1 point)

The Fort Bend County Extortion Ring

7) The cops clearly had no idea the woman was an escort; the arresting cops were with a “Narcotics Task Force” and were therefore spying on the “individual…on bond for drug-related charges” and probably thought all the comings and goings from the woman’s house were dope deals. They got a warrant based on that, hoping to find money and drugs they could steal, and were disappointed to find neither. But after rooting through her papers like the nosy perverts they are, they got her website address and looked it up, thereby discovering her business. Notice that the vice department is only said to have “collaborated in the investigation”, i.e, they told the drug-sniffing pigs what lies to tell about the hooker and advised them to claim videos of a type found in most people’s houses as “evidence of prostitution”. Incidentally, the vice department later took credit for the “bust” in a bogus statement claiming that “Officers from both the Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office and HPD had been trying to infiltrate this alleged sex business for months. They were tipped off by an anonymous letter, from a concerned resident.” This is of course total bullshit, but their egos can’t allow the public to know that a different department stumbled on it by accident, and a police state depends on cultivating distrust between neighbors by encouraging people to betray others to the “authorities”.

Score one point if you recognized that the bust was accidental, one for picking up on the drug connection, one for recognizing that the website was only found after the raid and one for recognizing that the vice department’s contribution was minor.

Scoring

1-3 Either you’re still asleep or you need to reread every column with the “cops” tag.
4-7 You’re fairly clever, but not nearly cynical enough (or vice versa).
8-11 You’ve definitely been paying attention and have a healthy level of cop-skepticism.
12-15 You’re either a whore, an ex-cop or a great student!

Once enough people can read stories like this and see them for what they are, perhaps there will be enough public outcry against these abuses that the courts will force police to stop them, and women quietly trying to make a living in the way which works best for them will no longer have to fear their homes being invaded and their freedom violated by brutal thugs who use the law as an excuse to assault, rob and abduct women.

I’m either going to fail, embarrassingly so for a freelance writer, or get a high score due to being a freelance writer who can see the usual linguistic bullshit coming a mile down the road. Here goes nothing…

1) In the first paragraph, why is the home’s proximity to a school mentioned?

Titillation. The reader is being led by the nose – “Oh my gawd, there were kids nearby, god only knows what they saw or what she might have done to them.” The perpetrator of this article wants you to imagine children walking by while some man is getting a blowjob in front of a picture window. Of note, “walking distance” is not defined (I have seen three miles labeled “walking distance”, and I know many people who get the car keys to go more than three blocks).

If the school had been too far, the hit-piece would have pointed out the proximity to a library, park or pediatrician’s office. Hospitals get included in the list if they have “Children’s” in the name, e.g., “Santa Rosa Children’s Hospital”.

2) What does “infiltrate Jordan’s business in an undercover capacity” actually mean? How about “persons associated with Jordan’s business”?

Effectively meaningless, as the functional definition is, “whatever the police and/or journalist feels like at the moment”. Quite likely the first is, “A policeman spoke to Jordan at some point without announcing he was an officer,” and the second is, “Anyone who called, texted, or walked by and nodded in the general vicinity.” The latter can include her sainted mother, however naif, if the police feel like it.

3) Do you think she actually had “a list of services and their respective prices” on her website?

Highly doubt it. Highly doubt it. I have seen ladies provide menus, and list prices-for-time, but the only times I have ever seen the two combined is when ladies upsell (Greek +100, or some such thing). Far, far more likely that she put up the usual list of how much her TIME cost and the police are lying outright about the rest of it.

4) How can porn videos be considered “evidence of prostitution”?

Ooh, ooh, I know this one! When idiocy + apathy + abuse of power + fueled hysteria = higher priority to the judicial system than the rule of law.

5) What is “contraband associated with operating a prostitution organization”?

Condoms. Alcohol. Currency in any form. A computer. A PDA. The presence or absence of women’s underthings. Anything which might be considered “sexually stimulating”, including the organic yogurt in the fridge and the birthday card from her sister with a handsome, gleaming young stud on the front picture. Especially, anything of value which can be confiscated and sold, netting a commission to the officer who stole it.

6) Why aren’t the police releasing the name of the other woman, who apparently wasn’t arrested?

She has a good attorney, and a plausible threat of lawsuit.

7) What do you think was the actual sequence of events here? Hint: look at the description of the “individual of note” and the last three sentences of the story.

No idea. The entire article suffers from the sort of associated-by-proximity writing common among journalists, and annoying to me. Namely, two sentences right next to each other commonly have nothing to correlate – there is no flow – the disassociated bits of info are merely strung in a manner which seems to infer what the writer wants you to think. Doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with anything.

Example:
My mother-in-law hates me. I’m not black.

The context appears to state my mother-in-law hates me because I am not black, which could be false even though the sentences are individually true.

Without a news story that flows, I can speculate a dozen ways this could have played out, all equally possible. Amazing, how many words journalists manage to use without giving you a real story.

Jordan’s home, in the 2900 block of Jane Long League Drive, is within walking distance of Pecan Grove Elementary School.
You know, in case you want to find her. And like Emily said: exactly what is “walking distance?” I walked three miles Monday, though I don’t usually walk that far all at once. I guess thirty miles is “walking distance” if you’re an ultra-marathoner.

– Numerous CDRs and DVDs containing sexually-explicit images and videos
Wow. I’m a hooker and I didn’t even know it. I mean, I have porn, and so I must be a hooker. The evidence is plain to see.

contraband associated with operating a prostitution organization
Condoms. That was my first thought.

Why aren’t the police releasing the name of the other woman, who apparently wasn’t arrested?
She’s an informant. She can break the law with impunity, as long as she keeps turning in others who break the same laws she does.

So Sailor is fairly clever and Emily is not a whore according to the results. Good to know! I fell between 1 and 15 so I’m a whore who hasn’t had her coffee yet LOL. Actually we had discussed this before it was printed here so I had a cheat sheet.

Maggie,
I am not sure how well I did either, but I think I did well. How would you score me? Of course I know know you do not know me Personally, but just from emails and post on here. Of course I am a Whore!..Head high though.

You know, I must add that it really always pissed me off that if a woman had vistors mostly male, but some female, the nieghbors would call the cops and she gets set up on, while if a man runs 15 females in and out of his place…PER DAY. The neighbors would not care and the men in the neighbohood would look up to him!!!

I would give myself an 8 since I’m feeling generous to myself. To be honest I didn’t think too hard on my answers because it just reminded me how so many cops have macho attitudes about their job and it annoys me. Sometimes it annoys me to the point of wanting to use the vastly superior firepower I command to give them a taste of their own medicine. Then I realize I’m being just as ridiculous as they are. *sigh* Stupid testosterone.

Whorish Media

Maggie on Twitter

Boring but necessary legal stuff

All original content on this website (i.e. all of my columns, pages and anything else which I write myself) is protected under international copyright law as of the time it is posted; though you may link to it as you please or quote passages (as long as you attribute the quote to me), please do not reproduce whole columns without my express written permission. In other words, you have to say "pretty please with sugar on top" first, and then wait for me to say "okey-dokey".